Evangelism Options

[yummy_delight]

A good friend of mine and I recently got into a heated debate about evangelism. We're both Christians, but we have very different ideas about evangelism. When my friend started getting really involved in church a few years ago, he also became a rampant evangelist. He believes that by bringing more people into the church he is not only saving them from eternal damnation, but also doing his duty as a Christian. He has often quoted Charles Spurgeon, saying "Every Christian is either a missionary or an imposter," essentially stating that you can't truly be Christian without evangelizing non believers.

I, however, don't like the idea of evangelism at all. Although I'm a devout Catholic, I dislike the idea of evangelism because I don't believe that anybody, myself included, has the right to force his or her beliefs on someone else. I think that everybody has a right to be whatever the religion they choose. Perhaps it's because I have a different idea about God than other people. I don't think that God sends honestly good people to Hell just because they don't believe in him. There are such things as Christian people who are hypocritical, paying lip service to God at church on Sundays, and still go about causing harm to other people. In my opinion, these people are less deserving of heaven than the good-hearted people whose only "fault" is that they don't believe in God. I think that my duty as a Christian is to be a good person and have a positive impact on the world, which doesn't necessarily mean that I HAVE to be an evangelist.

I'd just like to know what everyone else's opinion is on this, not merely from a Christian standpoint, but from another religion's or atheist's perspective as well. Do you approve of evangelism? Are you an evangelist? Do you think that evangelism is a necessary requirement for all good Christians?

[AngelinaTaylor]

I will just say one thing and I'll rest my case because (no offence) you're actually ridiculous in my eyes. Except for those "prophecies" (which for me are just not good enough), you have nothing else to back up Christianity. The bible is not a reliable source, especially since most of it is plagiarized from many ancient texts (Egyptian/Mesopotamian). Christianity is flawed. I do not understand why people take it literally, when, frankly, it does not make sense.

Please realize that the same evidence that Finkelstein reviews is seen by both sides and all that each expert says is prefaced with "I believe...", "I don't believe...", or "...as far as I can judge

So do evangelists. "I believe". Right? That's what faith is.

You even refuse to read "The End of Faith". I bet when you read my response you didn't even know what it was about. Mr. Harris presents his arguments with extensive back-up and over 60 pages of JUST footnotes, with many, many explanations. If that's not good enough for you.. sorry. There are many books you should consider. Especially "A letter to a christian nation" by the same author. But, I'm not expecting you to read that either. My friend refused to read it because it's "too dangerous" to her faith.

Come on. Most people know that taking biblical stories literally and treating them as the "word of god" (even though there are SO many similarities between religions) is deeply illogical.

Oh. And you say that the evidence of these prophecies are found in religious texts. That's not evidence.

Tell me what book you want me to read and I'll get it. I'm not fond of giving out my address to people online.

I'll try not to bother responding here anymore. No point. I don't understand how one can possibly be a fundamentalist.

P.S. Crucifiction in Rome meant that the person is killed for crimes against the state. If Jesus was really killed for religious crimes, they would've killed him with stones, as that was their custom. They did not.